ARMY RESEARCH LABORATORY

A Note on the Application of the

Extended Bernoulli Equation
by Steven B. Segletes and William P. Walters

ARL-TR-1895 February 1999

19990315 084
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
The findings in this report are not to be construed as an official
Department of the Army position unless so designated by other
authorized documents.

Citation of manufacturer's or trade names does not constitute an

official endorsement or approval of the use thereof.

Destroy this report when it is no longer needed. Do not return

it to the originator.
Army Research Laboratory
Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5066

ARL-TR-1895 February 1999

A Note on the Application of the

Extended Bernoulli Equation

Steven B. Segletes and William P. Walters

Weapons and Material Research Directorate, ARL

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

Abstract
A general form of the momentum equation is presented. Because the solution is presented
as an integral along a flow line, it is here referred to as an "extended" Bernoulli equation. The
equation, as presented, is valid for unsteady, compressible, rotational, elasto-viscoplastic flows
measured relative to a noninertial (translationally and/or rotationally accelerating) coordinate
system, whose motion is known. Though all of these concepts have long been separately
addressed in the educational literature of fluid and solid mechanics and dynamics, they are
usually not available from a single source, as the literature prefers to reduce the problem to
special-case solutions for instructional purposes. Two examples that make use of the extended
Bernoulli equation in noninertial reference frames are solved. The consequences of failing to
properly account for noninertial effects are discussed.

u
 Table of Contents

Page
1. Introduction 1
2. The Momentum Equation and Special Cases 2
3. Lagrangian vs. Eulerian Acceleration 4
4. Noninertial Reference Frames 5
5. Extended Bernoulli Equation 8
6. Nonsteady Potential Flow Around a Sphere 9
7. Nonsteady Solid Eroding-Rod Penetration 12
8. Consequences of Noninertiality 19
9. Conclusions 21
10. References 25
Distribution List 27
Report Documentation Page 43

in
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

IV
1. Introduction
The Bernoulli equation is perhaps the most famous and widely used equation in fluid
mechanics, relating the pressure, p, in a flow to the local velocity, V, and gravity potential. It
was derived by considering a balance of momentum along a streamline, for the special case of
steady, incompressible, inviscid flow in an inertial reference frame, with gravity as the only
significant body force. The Bernoulli equation may also be derived from considerations of
energy conservation, since, for inviscid flows, there is no energy loss. The Bernoulli equation
is given as

V2
p— + p + pgh = constant , (1)

where p is the flow density, g is the acceleration due to gravity, and h is the vertical height of
the flow relative to some reference location. Furthermore, if the flow is irrotational, the constant
of eqn (1) will be the same for all streamlines throughout the flow. The real world is rarely so
kind as to satisfy all the restrictive conditions under which eqn(l) was derived. Yet, because
the influence of these nonideal (compressible, viscous, rotational, accelerational) terms is often
small, the engineering world makes great use of eqn (1), often modifying it in an ad hoc manner
when nonideal effects rear their ugly head.

We endeavor here to pull together various equations and constructs from the literature into
a single framework, to present an unsteady, compressible, rotational, elasto-viscoplastic,
noninertially referenced momentum equation with no presuppositions. The importance of each
term can then be examined at the time of application to ascertain when discarding or
approximating it is appropriate. Because our primary interest in the subject lies in the area of
noninertial coordinate systems, examples of this variety, which make use of what might be called
an extended Bernoulli equation, are presented.

All of the concepts relating to the momentum equation that are discussed in this report
are readily available in one form or another throughout the educational literature of fluid
mechanics, solid mechanics, and dynamics. They are, however, not always found in a single

1
location. Furthermore, in an effort to teach textbook examples and solve textbook problems, the
educational literature quickly reduces the governing equation to certain well-known academic
cases, often failing to give full coverage to the general case involving viscous (or rotational),
compressible, accelerating, nonsteady flows in noninertial coordinate systems.

For example, Shames [1] generally does an excellent job of covering most aspects of the
momentum equation and noninertial reference frames, though it is done in terms of finite-sized
control volumes and not streamline-sized "flow tubes." Potter and Foss [2] cover all the relevant
equations regarding the forces and accelerations upon a material point in a flow, but fail to tie
the equations together into a generalized unsteady Bernoulli equation. Kelley [3] derives an
extended Bernoulli equation, but only for the case of nonviscous flows in inertial coordinate
systems. Currie [4] also derives a restrictive form of the extended Bernoulli equation, valid only
for irrotational flow in an inertial reference frame. The very thorough Schlichting [5], because
of its emphasis on boundary layers, does not even address the issue of noninertial coordinate
systems. Greenspan [6] examines the momentum equation in a noninertial frame, but only for
the special case of purely rotating frames, as might be found in the case of rotating fluid
problems. In addition to addressing the steady-state Bernoulli equation for streamlines, Lamb [7],
like Shames [1], also covers aspects of noninertial frames, but on an integrated volume basis.
Thus, this report is intended merely to serve as a handy repository of several important
well-established concepts that might otherwise need to be tracked down in a multiplicity of texts
and chapters.

2. The Momentum Equation and Special Cases

The momentum equation on a continuum element of material, which can be found in
many texts (e.g., Potter and Foss [2]), is given as

OV s... - Vp „
_ = -±L L + VO , (2)
Dt p

where DIDt denotes the material derivative (discussed in following section); V is the vector
velocity of the material element, as measured in an inertial reference frame; p is the element
pressure; p is the element density; <£ is the body force potential; V is the vector gradient
operator; s(J is the deviatoric-stress tensor arising from any type of elasto-viscoplastic constitutive
behavior; and s^j is index notation for dsy/dxp denoting the following vector condensation of the
deviatoric-stress tensor:

ds ds ds * ds ds ds * ds ds ds
s... = (—- + -J2L + _Ji) i + (-Jl + -JL + _£.); + (_ü + __£ + _ü) k . (3)
'■''■' dx dy dz dx dy dz dx dy dz

Eqn (2) is a general form of the momentum equation from which many commonly employed
special cases derive.

For example, when deviatoric stresses, sip are zero, as in the case of an inviscid fluid, the
momentum equation, eqn (2), becomes the well-known Euler's equation,

- --JL + VO . (4)
Dt p

For a body in equilibrium, where the material accleration, DVIDt, is everywhere zero, but where
deviatoric stresses, stj, may arise from elastic strains in the body, eqn (2) reduces to the
equilibrium equation of solid mechanics,

GUJ + pVO = 0 , (5)

where aijwj is the absolute-stress tensor condensation resulting from the combination of the
pressure gradient and deviatoric-stress condensation. On the other hand, if the flow is
accelerational, but the deviatoric stresses in eqn (2) arise solely from Newtonian viscosity, u, in
which shear stress is proportional to the associated velocity gradients (and assuming the validity
of Stokes' hypothesis), then the deviatoric-stress condensation can be expressed in terms of
velocity gradients (e.g., Schlichting [5]) to give the famous Navier-Stokes equation,

p— = pV<D -V/? + uV2V + Ü-V(V-V) . (6)

For incompressible viscous flow, the last term of eqn (6) will vanish, since, for incompressible
flow, the divergence of velocity is identically zero. This incompressible form of eqn (6) is known
as the incompressible Navier-Stokes equation. Eqns (4)-(6) each represent a useful special-case
solution of the general momentum equation, eqn (2).

3. Lagrangian vs. Eulerian Acceleration

Focusing on the left side of eqn (2), the material (also known as total or substantive)
acceleration, DVIDt, denotes the acceleration experienced by "any one" particle of material as
it traverses the flow field. In essence, it is the acceleration that would be measured by an
infinitesimal accelerometer immersed in and traveling with the surrounding flow. The
acceleration, DVIDt, is associated with a Lagrangian description of the flow field, in which
V = V{x,y,z,t). In the Lagrangian description, x, y, and z are variables that, when taken as spatial
coordinates (x,yj), define a particular material particle present at that coordinate at some given
reference time, t0. Once a material particle is defined (i.e., once the variables x, y, z are fixed
to particular values), the behavior of that particle becomes a function of time only and derivatives
with respect to time (e.g., acceleration) describe the time rate of change as perceived by the
material particle in question. The DIDt operator denotes these Lagrangian temporal derivatives,
for the special case where the particular material point (x,yj) is defined when the reference time,
tQ, is set to the current time, t, such that DVIDt = d/dt(V[x(t),y(t),z(t),t]).

Often, however, it is (mathematically or experimentally) more convenient to measure flow

properties (like acceleration) at fixed locations in space, rather than moving with a material
particle. This framework is associated with the Eulerian description of the flow field, in which
V = V(x,y,z,t). Unlike the Lagrangian description, however, in which the coordinates (x,y,z) define
a material particle at some reference time, t0, the Eulerian variables x, y, and z define points that
are forever fixed in coordinate space, even as material flows through that space. The measure
of flow acceleration in this description, referred to as the local acceleration, is performed at a
fixed point in space and denoted dVldt since spatial coordinates x, y, and z are held constant
when computing the time rate of change. Lumley [8] provides an excellent comparison of these
two frameworks. All undergraduate fluid mechanics texts derive the equations interrelating these
two frameworks, which are simply presented here as

4
 -^V[x(t),y(t),z(t),t] = BY. = ^ + (V-V)V . (7)
rf? Dt dt

In addition to the local acceleration, it is seen that the material acceleration is composed of terms
known as acceleration of transport, or convective acceleration, given by the last term of eqn (7).
This equation reveals how conditions in a flow field at all points fixed in space can be steady
(dV/dt = 0), while, at the same time, any material element of that flow experiences all manner of
accelerations as it traverses the field (DV/Dt^O).

Furthermore, a number of texts (e.g., Potter and Foss [2]) also present a form of eqn (7)
that has been manipulated via vector mechanics, to yield

2
DV = —
dV + yyfV
V ^
+ (VxV)xV . (8)
Dt dt 2
v ,
This form is especially interesting because it separates the V2 inertial-force term from the
vorticity-induced term involving cross products. For flows that are irrotational, all terms
involving vorticity, V x V, will vanish. Furthermore, the inertial-force term is the genesis of the
V2 dependence of the Bernoulli equation, eqn (1).

4. Noninertial Reference Frames

In the momentum equation, eqn (2), the material acceleration must be measured with
respect to an inertial reference frame. However, both experimentally and analytically (e.g., as
in the case of potential flow), it is often more convenient to measure coordinates with respect to
a body of interest within the flow field. If the body moves with constant velocity, then such
body coordinates serve also as an inertial reference system. If, however, the forces of the flow
upon the body serve to accelerate the body, the body coordinates are no longer inertial and
eqn (2) is no longer valid as measured in the body coordinate frame.

Any undergraduate dynamics text (e.g., Beer and Johnson [9]) and many fluid mechanics
texts (e.g., Shames [1] and Potter and Foss [2]) derive or present the equation for acceleration of
a particle, when the kinematics of particle motion are measured with respect to a noninertial
reference frame xyz. Using the notation of Figure 1, in which the noninertial frame xyz moves
with respect to an inertial reference frame XYZ by way of translation vector S(t) and rotation
vector Q(0, while the kinematics of the particle motion in question are measured with respect
to xyz by the displacement vector R(t), one obtains

A = a + — + 2ßxV^ + Qx(QxÄ) + — xR , (9)

where A is the total acceleration with respect to XYZ; Vm = dRIdt is the velocity measured in the
noninertial xyz frame; and a =DVxyJDt is the material acceleration, as measured in xyz.

Since eqn (2), the momentum equation, can only be valid when applied in an inertial
frame, eqn (9) provides the means to apply eqn (2) with respect to the inertial XYZ, even when
the flow kinematics (e.g., R and V) are measured with respect to a translating and rotating xyz,
which are perhaps attached to a body of interest. Realizing that the inertial acceleration, A, in
eqn (9) corresponds to the material acceleration, DVlDt, presented on the left side of the inertially
constrained eqn (2), we have by substitution

S
A = —ZL + — + 2QxV + QxjQxR) + ^IxR = ^~Vp + V<D , (10)
Dt dt2 dt p

Substitution of eqn (8) for the noninertial xyz material acceleration, DVmIDt, and some simple
rearrangement gives the following result:

v
m + <£S_ + (VxV
v )xy + 2QxV + Qx(£lxR) + —xR
v
,.•> xyz' xyz xyz ' j
dt dt2 m
* "* dt t

s...
,J,J
- Vp W*
= V$ + - — (ID
P 2

Eqn (11) is valid at all points in a compressible, elasto-viscoplastic, rotational, nonsteady flow
subject to conservative body forces, as measured in a reference frame undergoing time-dependent
translational and rotational motions.
Figure 1. Depiction of the noninertial reference frame xyz translating (S) and rotating (Q)
with respect to inertial frame XYZ. Flow kinematic variables R, Vxy7? and a are
measured with respect to the noninertial xyz frame.
 The first two terms of eqn(ll) represent the inertial XYZ rigid-body translation^
acceleration of the material point in question. The third term, involving vorticity, V x V,
represents acceleration resulting from flow vorticity, as measured in xyz. The remaining terms
on the left-hand side represent Coriolis, centripetal, and rotational accelerations arising strictly
from the time-dependent rotational motion of the noninertial reference frame xyz. On the
right side of eqn(ll), the traditional Bernoulli force terms (body, pressure, and inertial) as well
those involving deviatoric-stress gradients are found.

5. Extended Bernoulli Equation

While the term "Bernoulli equation" describes only the relation given in eqn(l), it is
popular to use the term "Bernoulli" to describe the momentum equation when integrated along
a contour in a flow field, even if the restrictive conditions (steady, incompressible, inviscid flow
in an inertial reference frame, with gravity as the only significant body force) that are in force
for eqn (1) have been relaxed. In this spirit, eqn (11) may be integrated along an arbitrary flow
contour fixed in noninertial xyz space (thus translating and rotating with S and Q in XYZ space)
and the result referred to as an extended Bernoulli equation. The contour integration yields

f( 22. + —YdR + [(VxV )-(V xdR)

R, Ä,

fcßxV^ + flx(ßxfi) + ^LxR^-dR = (<£ - V^/2)£ + |(^ - -ZJ-dR , (12)

dt

where the vector increment dR is made to follow the path of the contour throughout the
integration. This result is valid for nonsteady, compressible, rotational, elasto-viscoplastic flows
in a noninertial reference frame. Note that a minor vector manipulation has been performed upon
the vorticity integral term. Furthermore, the gradient integrals of inertial and body forces on the
right-hand side of eqn (12) were reduced to a difference in the values of V2/2 and <3> between the
two endpoints of the contour. The pressure gradient integral may also be a function of the
contour endpoint values, {pip), but only if the flow is incompressible; otherwise, the term must
be integrated along the contour. Unfortunately, the deviatoric-stress integral must, in general, be

8
explicitly performed, as it does not represent a gradient potential. The contour of integration in
eqn(12) may be any arbitrary three-dimensional contour. However, the resulting equation,
because of the vector mathematics, will be scalar.

Different types of problems will employ different terms of this equation. For example,
problems of fluids involving turbomachinery will allow the first integral to be discarded if the
problem, when viewed in a rotating coordinate system can be made to appear steady. For
irrotational flows, such as are found in many applications of potential flow theory, the second
integral may be discarded. Even when the flow is rotational, if the integration contour is, at a
particular instant in time, also a streamline (i.e., everywhere parallel to the velocity vector), the
second integral also disappears, as VxdR will be zero at all places along a streamline. For the
problem of linearly accelerating bodies within a flow field, the noninertial body-coordinate
system xyz need not rotate and the third integral may therefore be discarded for problems of this
type. Typical conditions that could justify elimination of terms on the right-hand side of the
equation would involve negligible body forces and/or shear stresses (inviscid, nonelastic).

Several examples involving the use of eqn(12) are now investigated. Because our
primary interest in the subject lies in the area of noninertial coordinate systems, we will focus
on problems of this type.

6. Nonsteady Potential Flow Around a Sphere

The use of flow potentials to solve a variety of steady flow problems is a well-established
procedure in fluid mechanics textbooks. Mention is usually made of nonsteady potential flow
by showing an equation involving a time-derivative of the potential, but nonsteady potential-flow
problems are not typically solved or explained in textbooks. One reason becomes quickly
apparent, when it is considered that most potential flow fields extend infinitely in at least one
direction. In particular, any time-dependent variation of a potential flow field will often involve
time-dependent variations at infinity. Time-dependent velocities involve accelerations, and
accelerations require forces. And though steady flow around a fixed body is inertially equivalent
to that body's uniform motion through a quiescent medium, it is most definitely not true that
the force required to accelerate a body through a medium at rest (e.g., the universe) is identical
to the force required to accelerate the universe around the at-rest body.

Fortunately, eqn (12) allows one to overcome this difficulty. An unsteady potential flow
problem, in which the universe is allowed to accelerate about a fixed-in-space potential-flow
body, can be solved, as long as it is realized that the potential-flow body is fixed in noninertial
xyz space—a coordinate system that is, in effect, accelerating equal and opposite to the
acceleration of the potential-flow far-field. In this way, the net far-field acceleration is zero and
the unsteady motion of a body through an inertial flow field is truly modeled. This argument
is valid for both linear and rotational far-field accelerations.

The potential-flow solution for invisicid, nonrotational, incompressible, uniform flow

about a rigid sphere is published in many textbooks (e.g., Potter and Foss [2], Shames [1]). The
flow field, in polar (r,8) coordinates, is given by

vr = C/cos0 (1 -ro/r3) , and

ve = -t/sinB (1 +r03/r3) , (13)

where U represents the uniform free-flow velocity about a sphere of radius r0, fixed at the origin
of the coordinate system (with the flow traveling from the -x toward the +x direction). To make
this flow unsteady, allow the free-flow velocity to be a function of time, U(t). Recall, to avoid
the complication of trying to force the universe to accelerate around the sphere, that the potential-
flow coordinate axes, xyz, attached to the sphere, are in fact simultaneously traveling toward the
-x direction with a nonsteady velocity of magnitude U(t).

Realize that this problem does not involve vorticity, employs a noninertial reference frame
that does not rotate, has negligible body forces, has no shear stresses (inviscid), and is
incompressible. The extended Bernoulli equation for this problem then becomes

10
 ^V„
xyz d*S\ ■dR
Jn [Vlv (14)
f dt
+
dt i 2
= -x
2 p

where /?, and R2 are the endpoints of the integration contour. If the integration contour is chosen
to be the (straight line) stagnation contour traversing from (-°°,0,0) to (-r0,0,0), the only velocity
component of relevance to the integral is the x component, so that

VJiX'V = -vJe=* = u
® C1 + r
o^3) (for x<-r0,y = z = 0) . (15)

The terms from the right-hand side of eqn(14) may thus be evaluated as follows:

l
(16)
i\dt dt) p 2 pI

To finish the solution, dVJdt needs to be evaluated from eqn(15) and substituted into
eqn (16). Time-dependent potential flows (and others) often have the virtue of being separable
in space and time, as in Vx(x,t) = U(t)-g(x). If the one-dimensional (1-D) contour length is
infinite in extent, the spatial integral of the time derivative, in this separable case, may be
expressed as

]!Lfc.££-]2-*.
J dt dt 1 U
(i7)
-oo -oo

Alternately, if the 1-D contour were of finite length, eqn (17) could be expressed as

\^ldx-^L(b-a)-A (18)
J dt dt Uib-a)

The right side of eqn (18) is composed of the free-stream acceleration multiplied by the contour
length as well as a quotient factor. The quotient factor is the average velocity along the contour
divided by the free-stream velocity, and, in the case of a stagnation contour, it will generally fall
in the range from zero to unity, depending on the details of the flow.

11
 In the present case, eqn(17) is utilized for the evaluation of eqn(16). It is noted that
there is a canceling of the dUldt term, which is necessary to avoid computing the force necessary
to accelerate the universe. For the considered flow integrated along the specified contour,
eqn (16) may be evaluated as

pU2 + Pr dU
p -p = —— —0 . nm
(19)

Thus, if the time-dependent velocity of the sphere is known, the stagnation pressure may be
evaluated with eqn (19). That pressure varies from what would be predicted by the Bernoulli
equation, eqn (1), by a term involving the acceleration rate of the sphere. If the acceleration of
the sphere is positive, the stagnation pressure is seen to be higher than the Bernoulli pressure,
while, if the sphere is decelerating, the stagnation pressure is less.

7. Nonsteady Solid Eroding-Rod Penetration

The problem of eroding-rod penetration has been examined by a number of researchers
in recent years. The seminal works on subject were done independently by Alekseevskii [10] and
Täte [11] more than 30 years ago. Täte, in subsequent work [12-13], examines the flow field
associated with long-rod penetration in more detail. In the course of the work [12], the effect and
magnitude of the noninertial influence are calculated for his idealized flow potential. Täte
concludes that, when the long-rod penetration process can be considered as quasi-steady, the
noninertial effects may be neglected. Since then, a thorough and insightful analysis of the
relevant balance equations was performed by Wright and Frank [14]. Their analysis computes
surface and volume integrals over the relevant region in the vicinity of the rod/target interaction
zone and was able to show that the target resistance term of Alekseevskii [10] and Täte [11]
encompasses more than just a simple measure of target strength.

A more recent treatise on the subject, which instead relies upon a force/momentum
balance along the centerline contour only, is that of Walker and Anderson [15]. Upon assuming
certain reasonable velocity fields in the tip of the rod and in the target crater, they proceed to
solve the momentum equation in glorious detail, directly in the inertial XYZ laboratory frame of

12
reference, to include noninertial effects. The analysis presented here is not intended to supplant
the esteemed work of Walker and Anderson. Rather, it is intended to show that the concepts
derived herein may be very simply applied to the same problem to a similar end. Furthermore,
the manner in which an accelerating coordinate system, attached to the rod/target interface,
affects the overall result should be apparent in a more direct way.

In the eroding-rod problem (see Figure 2), a solid rod, of density pR, instantaneous length
L, and velocity V, penetrates into a semi-infinite block of density pT. The rod is assumed to
support a uniaxial-stress state in the longitudinal direction of the rod. The eroding interface is
traveling into the target at velocity U. Furthermore, employing the assumed velocity profiles
suggested by Walker and Anderson, there is a small plastically deforming region located at the
eroding tip of the rod, of length s, where the velocity linearly transitions from the rigid-body rod
velocity of V to the interface velocity of U. On the target side of the interface, the crater
geometry (Figure 3) is locally considered a hemisphere of radius R in polar (r,0) coordinates,
with the target flow velocity, u, along the axis of symmetry decaying as

2
u 1 aR -1 (R<r<aR) , (20)
2
U a -1 L

while remaining zero at all distances r at and beyond aR. The parameter a defines an extent of
plasticity in the target, with a> 1 defining a finite-sized plastic zone in the target, and a—»1*
denoting the limiting case of infmitesimally thin plastic zone. Along the axis of symmetry of
the noninertial xyz coordinate system of Figure 3, z = r - R. Both the projectile
«
and target plastic-
flow zones may be considered incompressible, despite the axial velocity gradients, because of an
associated radial divergence of the flow field.

Because V, U, and L are changing with time t, the reference frame attached to the
rod/target interface will be a noninertial frame xyz traveling at the time-dependent velocity U.
Though Walker and Anderson considered the general case of time-varying s and a, these
geometry parameters are held constant for simplicity. From the perspective of the interface

13
 Plastic Zone Plastic Zone
in Rod in Target

Figure 2. Geometry of the solid eroding-rod problem.

Figure 3. Assumed target flow pattern in target, per Walker and Anderson [15]. Note that,
along the axis of symmetry, the crater coordinate, r, is related to interface
coordinate, z, by z = r - R.

14
coordinate system xyz, the velocity as a function of axial coordinate z, along the centerline of the
problem, can be given as

v-u -L<z< -s
-(V - U) zls -s<z<0
Vz = U -U 0<z<(a-l)R
a" 1 R+z
-U z>(a-l)R (21)

This flow field is schematically shown in Figure 4. Specifying the extended Bernoulli equation,
eqn (12), along the contour defined by the axis of symmetry, for this case of irrotational (along
the axis of symmetry), incompressible flow with only rectilinear accelerations, the extended
Bernoulli equation reduces into a 1-D integration in z, yielding

2 Z, *2
V. 2oXZ,X +GZZ,Z \J
,
'♦£!W--.ü
dt I ~2
+ (22)
fi z, z

The factor of 2 on the axlJ, term arises because of symmetry, for which oxv and ayzy are equal
on the axis of symmetry. Furthermore, because the integration contour is aligned with the z axis
and the flow is incompressible, the G^ integral will amount to a difference of (o^/p) between
the contour endpoints. This equation is, of course, identical to the momentum equation derived
by Walker and Anderson, though expressed in the noninertial xyz coordinates, rather than the
laboratory XYZ coordinate frame.

First, limit the fixed integration contour to the elastic portion of the solid rod, spanning
the range -L<z< s, and solve eqn(22) in light of the velocity field specified by eqn(21).
Because the rod velocity at z = s and z = -L are identical, the contribution of the V2 gradient
integral is zero. Further, because the stress state in the rod is assumed uniaxial in z, the shear-
stress-gradient integral will be exactly zero. Finally, note how the dUldt acceleration terms from
V, and the noninertial frame acceleration cancel out. Thus, one obtains

15
Figure 4. Schematic depicting the assumed velocity field along the axis of symmetry of the
eroding rod and target.

16
 ÄL-5) = _L(-7Ä-0) , (23)
dt PÄ

where YR is the yield strength of the rod, being exactly the uniaxial-stress state (where tension
is defined as positive) at the elastic-plastic interface [i.e., aa(z = -s) = -YR]. This is the
high-sound-speed limiting result of Walker and Anderson (since it was not here accounted for
the finite wave speed at which acceleration information travels down an elastic bar). They noted
further that, were the size of the rod's plastic zone, s, a negligible percentage of the overall rod
length, L, eqn (23) reduces to the Alekseevskii-Tate rod deceleration equation, dVldt = -YR/(pRL).
Despite any decelerations of the noninertial frame traveling at velocity U with the rod/target
interface, the rod deceleration equation is totally independent of interface velocity U.

Secondly, reconsider eqn (22) over a different integration contour, still along the axis of
symmetry but spanning from -L<z<0, thereby including the complete rod in the integration.
The terms of eqn (23) are thus retained, while adding to them the terms that arise from the small
plastic zone at the tip of the eroding rod. Denoting the axial stress aa, at the rod/target interface,
as ostag, one obtains

dv{L.s) .{dv_du■ s , dus . _r, , omt _ (-r*) , <y-u? (24)

K
dt dt dt' 2 dt pR pR pR 2

This result is identical to the result of Walker and Anderson, for the case of constant plastic zone
extent, s. It can be solved for the compressive stagnation stress at the rod/target interface and,
by making use of a substitution of eqn (23), results in

V Uf
-o....-^
stag : ^Y.-i^^-C.
^dt + dt'
(25)

If the extent of the rod's plastic zone, s, is small compared to rod length, L, or if the penetration
process is steady (i.e., velocity derivatives zero), the last term in eqn (25) becomes negligible and
the remaining terms become identical to the expression proposed by Täte [11] for the stagnation
stress on the rod side of the rod/target interface.

17
 Turning to the target, the integration contour is defined to be along the axis of symmetry
throughout the target. That is, eqn (22) is integrated between 0 < z < °°, in light of eqn (21), to
obtain
(a 1)Ä
dUldt (aRy^2 +z ' f dU + dU]
cc2-l (R + z) Jo dt dt J (a-l)S

(o-l)fi

dx dx (26)
2 PT PT i Pr Jw •
The last term of both sides of the equation (the rigid-body acceleration term on the left, and the
shear-stress integration on the right) are both zero, since the target material beyond the region
of plastic extent, z > (a - l)R, is essentially undisturbed. Solving for the axial stagnation stress
on the target side of the rod/target interface gives

-a =^!l + (>TTR^L^Zl-27^dz. (27)

"a* 2 dt a + 1 J dx

Since this paper is primarily concerned with the kinematics of nonsteady flow fields, it
is not intended to delve into the constitutive relations by which the shear-stress integral along the
centerline contributes to the stagnation pressure beneath an eroding rod. Walker and
Anderson [15] may be consulted for these details for those interested. Suffice it to say that the
terms in eqn (27) correspond identically to their terms associated with target stresses, for the
special case of fixed extent of target plasticity (i.e., constant a). Furthermore, they note that, for
the limiting case of small crater radius, R -> 0 (corresponding to truly 1-D penetration), the shear-
stress integral becomes the sole modification to the Bernoulli stagnation pressure. For the
fixed-a case, this shear-stress integral becomes a positive constant related to the yield strength
of the target material and is traditionally given the name target resistance, denoted Rr One may
infer from the result of Walker and Anderson that, in addition to the target's inertial head
(pr£/2/2), it is the target's shear-stress field, rather than the acceleration of target material under
the penetrator, that is the primary contributor to interface pressure on the target side of the
interface, when the penetration process is nearly steady.

18
 By limiting the scope of problem complexity and by achieving algebraic expediency via
the use of a noninertial rod/target interface coordinate system, the primary result of Walker and
Anderson, who spent quite a number of journal pages exhaustively addressing this subject, has
been recreated in the span of several paragraphs. For those who don't wish to dwell on the solid-
mechanics aspects of their derivations, the parts of the problem dealing with accelerations and
noninertial frames can be grasped here, in their essence.

8. Consequences of Noninertiality
The means of accounting for the noninertiality of a reference system have long been
established and are embodied in eqn(9). Failure to properly take these terms into account,
however, will lead to erroneous calculations in various forms. Consider the two example
problems examined in the proceeding text to see the consequences of improperly applying the
momentum equation in a noninertial frame.

For the accelerating sphere problem, failing to subtract out the dUldt acceleration of the
noninertial xyz frame would have added a term to the stagnation pressure, eqn (19), of magnitude
p • dU/dt multiplied by the contour length, call it I. Obviously, for a contour of infinite length,
the error would be infinite, resulting from the fact that the pressure being computed arose from
accelerating the whole mass of the universe about the sphere. If the contour length were finite,
the added pressure term, being proportional to contour length, is like the situation existing within
a (inviscid) wind tunnel. Additional pressure head needs to be supplied to the tunnel in order
to accelerate the flow through the tunnel test section. A quick inspection of the form of eqn (19)
(augmented on the right side by p / • dUldt) reveals that, as the pressure differential is raised
across the test section, the flow velocity will accelerate to eventually reach a new equilibrium
velocity. The length of the test-section contour, /, denoting the length (and thus mass) of the
flow to be accelerated, will govern the time constant of the acceleration. So, in the case of the
problem of an accelerating sphere, improperly ignoring the noninertiality of the reference frame
actually changes the problem to one of a sphere fixed in a wind tunnel.

19
 For the eroding-rod problem, the consequences of ignoring the noninertiality of the
interface coordinate system produce a different set of errors. The consequences upon the rod
deceleration equation, eqn (23), would literally be to replace dVldt with d(V - U)/dt, as in

^-ü)(r-.)B-y« (28)
dt 9R

For a symmetric impact of like materials at speeds above the elastic limit, U will typically be on
the order of V72. In such a case, the effect on rod deceleration will be an error on the order
of 100%. For cases where U is a larger percentage of V, as in the case of high-density-rod
penetration, the error in the deceleration calculation is correspondingly increased.

On the target side of the interface, failure to account for the acceleration of the coordinate
system will introduce a -pT-l-dU/dt contribution to right side of the momentum balance
equation, eqn (27), as in

-o, = ^ + TR£L^1
PT - 2°T^L& - pTl™ . (29)
'"" 2 dt a+1 I Bx dt
Here, / denotes a contour length of target material to be integrated [assumed greater than or equal
to (a - 1)R], and dUldt is negative for a decelerating rod. The first warning flag is that the last
term of eqn (29) is proportional to the contour length which, for a semi-infinite target, is infinite
in length. Such an improper inertial interpretation again leads to a calculation of the force to
accelerate the universe with respect to the rod/target interface. If, on the other hand, the
thickness of the target were finite, or if the integrated contour length, /, were arbitrarily made
finite, eqn (29) though quite incorrect, might seem less obviously so. If length / of the integrated
contour were large enough to dominate the other terms of eqn (29), leading to

a,stag =pTT/—
dt
, (30)

one might erroneously conclude that the normal interface stress, oslag, is primarily supported by
the "apparent" deceleration of target material relative to the rod/target interface, rather than by

20
the inertial head and elastic shear-stress distribution within the target. In reality, the true effect
of interface deceleration [second term on the right side of eqns (27) and (29)] has just the
opposite effect (i.e., opposite sign): when the interface and associated target material are
traveling at velocity U, a deceleration of the interface actually lowers the stagnation stress
because not only is U made lower in the process, but also the associated target material is
inertially tending to travel at U and resists any decrease in interface velocity. This resistance of
target material to decelerate (i.e., the inertia of the plastically entrained crater material) would
have the effect of superimposing an axial-tension field on top of the steady-state (inertial)
compression distribution. Thus, the act of interface deceleration actually lowers the interface
stress.

Another reality check, which would indicate the inappropriateness of eqn (30), is the
inference that a positive acceleration of the rod/target interface would be met with tension at the
interface. Such accelerations invariably occur, when the penetration of a multilayered target
transitions from a high-density target element to a lower density element of comparable strength.
Yet, it is known that such a transition is not accompanied by tension at the rod/target interface.
Thus, in the case of an eroding rod undergoing deceleration, it may be concluded that a proper
accounting of the noninertial behavior of the rod/target interface is crucial to a proper formulation
of the overall problem.

9. Conclusions
Once the groundwork for the extended Bernoulli equation, eqn (12), has been laid, the
solution to actual problems can often proceed quickly. All of the concepts necessary to develop
this equation have existed in the educational literature of fluid and solid mechanics and dynamics
for many years, if not centuries. However, all of the applicable terms contributing to the
equation are not generally located in a single source, as the educational literature prefers to
expeditiously reduce the governing momentum equation to special-case solutions for instructional
purposes. These special-case limitations often include steady, incompressible, irrotational, or
inviscid flows in inertial reference frames.

21
 The momentum equation along an integration contour within a general flow field has been
herein rederived. By placing no restrictions on the type or manner of flow, the equation has been
presented, using the popular terminology, as an "extended" Bernoulli equation. The equation,
as presented, is valid for unsteady, compressible, rotational, elasto-viscoplastic flows measured
relative to a noninertial (translating and/or rotating) coordinate system, whose motion is known.

Of particular interest were flows measured relative to noninertially translating coordinate

systems. As such, two example problems of this variety have been solved in this report. The
effect of coordinate system noninertiality introduces additional terms into the momentum
equation, which are only ignored at the peril of the investigator. In the case of a rigid sphere
accelerating within a quiescent inviscid medium, a failure to consider the noninertial terms has
the effect of solving a different, though valid, problem of a stationary sphere in a wind tunnel.

In the case of the solid eroding-rod problem, by comparing the present analysis to that
of Walker and Anderson [15] (who solved the identical problem in the inertial laboratory frame
of reference), it was observed that choosing a convenient coordinate system (even if noninertial)
can significantly simplify the algebraic manipulation of the governing momentum equation.
However, if misapplied, the consequence of failing to account for the acceleration of the eroding
interface produces significant errors, numerically and conceptually. First, the rod deceleration
rate is miscalculated, often by a factor of 2 or greater. Also, in the target, the basic
understanding of the problem is completely distorted by failure to properly account for the
noninertiality of the interface reference frame. In reality, the inertial head and elastic shear-stress
distribution within the target are primarily responsible for the buildup of interface pressure, while
the interface deceleration, because of the target-material inertia in the plastically entrained zone
of the target, actually ameliorates the interface stress. From the point of view of the noninertial
frame however, one might erroneously conclude that the interface deceleration was actually the
primary cause for the buildup of stress on the target side of the interface—a conclusion totally
opposite from and in contradiction to the properly formulated (inertial) momentum balance.

22
 This report presents a general form of the momentum equation that is extremely useful
for solving a great variety of problems that might not otherwise fall into idealized categories.
The solved examples help to illustrate the power of choosing a convenient frame of reference in
which to solve a given problem. However, the examples also serve to emphasize the vital
importance of properly accounting for effects of accelerating reference frames.

23
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

24
10. References
1. Shames, I. H. Mechanics of Fluids. McGraw-Hill: New York, 1962.

2. Potter, M. C. and J. F. Foss. Fluid Mechanics. Great Lakes Press, 1982.

3. Kelley, J.B. "The Extended Bernoulli Equation." Amer. J. Phys., 18, pp. 202-204, 1950.

4. Currie, I. G. Fundamental Mechanics of Fluids. McGraw-Hill: New York, 1974.

5. Schlichting, H. Boundary Layer Theory. Seventh (English) Edition, McGraw-Hill: New York,
1979.

6. Greenspan, H. P. The Theory of Rotating Fluids. Breukelen: Brookline, 1990.

7. Lamb, H. Hydrodynamics. First American Edition, Dover: New York, 1945.

8. Lumley, J. L. "Eulerian and Lagrangian Descriptions in Fluid Mechanics." in Illustrated

Experiments in Fluid Mechanics, pp. 3-10, National Committee for Fluid Mechanic Films.
MIT: Cambridge, 1972.

9. Beer, F. P. and E. R. Johnson, Jr. Vector Mechanics for Engineers: Dynamics. Third Edition,
McGraw-Hill: New York, 1977.

10. Alekseevskii, V.P. "Penetration of a Rod into a Target at High Velocity." Comb. Expl. and
Shock Waves, 2, pp. 63-66, 1966.

11. Täte, A. "A Theory for the Deceleration of Long Rods After Impact." J. Mech. Phys.
Solids, 15, pp. 387-399, 1967.

12. Täte, A. "Long Rod Penetration Models—Parti. A Row Field Model for High Speed Long
Rod Penetration." Int. J. Mech. Sei., 28: 8, pp. 535-548, 1986.

13. Täte, A. "Long Rod Penetration Models—Part II. Extensions to the Hydrodynamic Theory
of Penetration." Int. J. Mech. Sei., 28: 9, pp. 599-612, 1986.

14. Wright, T.W. and K. Frank. "Approaches to Penetration Problems." BRL-TR-2957,

U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, December
1988.

15. Walker, J. D. and C.E.Anderson, Jr. "A Time-Dependent Model for Long-Rod
Penetration." Int. J. Impact Engng., 16:1, pp. 19-48, 1995.

25
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

26
NO. OF NO. OF
COPIES ORGANIZATION COPIES ORGANIZATION

DEFENSE TECHNICAL 1 DIRECTOR

INFORMATION CENTER US ARMY RESEARCH LAB
DTICDDA AMSRLD
8725 JOHN J KINGMAN RD RWWHALIN
STE0944 2800 POWDER MUX RD
FT BELVOIR VA 22060-6218 ADELPHI MD 20783-1145

HQDA DIRECTOR
DAMOFDQ US ARMY RESEARCH LAB
D SCHMIDT AMSRLDD
400 ARMY PENTAGON JJROCCHIO
WASHINGTON DC 20310-0460 2800 POWDER MILL RD
ADELPHI MD 20783-1145
OSD
OUSD(A&T)/ODDDR&E(R) DIRECTOR
RJTREW US ARMY RESEARCH LAB
THE PENTAGON AMSRL CS AS (RECORDS MGMT)
WASHINGTON DC 20301-7100 2800 POWDER MILL RD
ADELPHI MD 20783-1145
DPTY CG FOR RDE HQ
US ARMY MATERIEL CMD DIRECTOR
AMCRD US ARMY RESEARCH LAB
MG CALDWELL AMSRL CILL
5001 EISENHOWER AVE 2800 POWDER MILL RD
ALEXANDRIA VA 22333-0001 ADELPHI MD 20783-1145

INST FOR ADVNCD TCHNLGY ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND

THE UNIV OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN
PO BOX 202797 DIRUSARL
AUSTIN TX 78720-2797 AMSRL CILP (305)

DARPA
B KASPAR
3701 N FAIRFAX DR
ARLINGTON VA 22203-1714

NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CTR

CODE B07 J PENNELLA
17320 DAHLGRENRD
BLDG 1470 RM 1101
DAHLGREN VA 22448-5100

US MILITARY ACADEMY
MATH SCI CTR OF EXCELLENCE
DEPT OF MATHEMATICAL SCI
MAJMDPHTTIJPS
THAYERHALL
WEST POINT NY 10996-1786

27
NO. OF NO. OF
COPIES ORGANIZATION COPIES ORGANIZATION

1 US ARMY DUSA OPS RSCH COMMANDER

D WILLARD US ARMY BELVOIR RD&E CTR
102 ARMY PENTAGON STRBE NAE B WESTLICH
WASHINGTON DC 20310-0102 STRBE JMC T HANSHAW
STRBE NAN
5 DEFENSE NUCLEAR AGENCY S G BISHOP
MAJ J LYON J WILLIAMS
CDR K W HUNTER FORT BELVOIR VA 22060-5166
T FREDERICKSON
R J LAWRENCE COMMANDER
SPSP K KIBONG US ARMY RESEARCH OFFICE
6801 TELEGRAPH RD KIYER
ALEXANDRIA VA 22310-3398 J BAILEY
S F DAVIS
3 COMMANDER POBOX 12211
US ARMY ARDEC RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK NC 27709-2211
AMSTA AR FSA E
W P DUNN NAVAL AIR WARFARE CTR
J PEARSON S A FINNEGAN
E BAKER BOX 1018
PICATINNY ARSENAL NJ 07806-5000 RIDGECREST CA 93556

COMMANDER 4 COMMANDER
US ARMY ARDEC NAVAL WEAPONS CENTER
AMSTA AR CCH V M D NICOLICH N FASIG CODE 3261
PICATINNY ARSENAL NJ 07806-5000 T T YEE CODE 3263
D THOMPSON CODE 3268
COMMANDER W J MCCARTER CODE 6214
US ARMY ARDEC CHINA LAKE CA 93555
E ANDRICOPOULOS
PICATINNY ARSENAL NJ 07806-5000 12 COMMANDER
NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CTR
COMMANDER DAHLGREN DIVISION
USA STRATEGIC DEFNS CMD HCHEN
CSSD H LL T CROWLES D L DICKINSON CODE G24
HUNTSVELLE AL 35807-3801 C R ELLINGTON
C R GARRETT CODE G22
COMMANDER W HOLT CODE G22
US ARMY MICOM W E HOYE CODE G22
AMSMI RD ST WF R MCKEOWN
SHELL J M NELSON
D LOVELACE MJ SELL CODE HI 1
M SCHEXNAYDER W J STROTHER
REDSTONE ARSENAL AL 35898-5250 A B WARDLAW JR
L F WILLIAMS CODE G33
MIS DEFNS & SPACE TECHNOLOGY 17320 DAHLGREN RD
CSSD SD T K H JORDAN DAHLGREN VA 22448
PO BOX 1500
HUNTSVILLE AL 34807-3801

28
NO. OF NO. OF
COPIES ORGANIZATION COPIES ORGANIZATION

AIR FORCE ARMAMENT LAB 33 LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY

AFATL DLJW C WINGATE MS D413
WCOOK G GISLER MS D436
M NIXON B LAUBSCHER MS D460
AFATL DLJR J FOSTER M O SCHNICK MS F607
AFATL MNW R WELLS MS F607
LT D LOREY RKOPP MSF645
R D GUBA T ADAMS MS F663
EGLIN AFB FL 32542 R GODWIN MS F663
K JACOBY MS F663
USAF PHILLIPS LABORATORY W SPARKS MS F663
VTSI E J CHAPYAK MS F664
R ROYBAL J SHANER MS F670
KIRTLAND AFB NM 87117-7345 G CANAVAN MS F675
R GREINER MS G740
USAF PHILLIPS LABORATORY J HILLS MS G770
PL WSCD F ALLAHDADI B HOGAN MS G770
PV VTA D SPENCER J BOLSTAD MS G787
3550 ABERDEEN AVE SE R HENNINGER MS K557 N6
KIRTLAND AFB NM 87117-5776 T ROLLET MS K574
PHOWE MSP915
WRIGHT LABS W DEAL MS P915
MNMW J W HOUSE J KENNEDY MS P915
ARMAMENT DIRECTORATE STE 326 Bl A ROACH MS P915
RDHUNT W HEMSING MS P940
B MILLIGAN E POGUE MS P940
B C PATTERSON J MCAFEE MS P950
W H VAUGHT D PAISLEY MS P950
101 W EGLIN BLVD L PICKLESIMER MS P950
EGLIN AFB FL 32542-6810 R WARNES MS P950
S SHEFFIELD MS P952
AFIT ENC KMARK
D AFULK S J MOSSO
WRIGHT PATTERSON AFB OH 45433 L SCHWALBE
PO BOX 1663
12 LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY LOS ALAMOS NM 87545
M LUCERO MS A105
LHULL MSA133 9 SANDIA NATIONAL LABORATORIES
J V REPA MS Al 33 MAIL SERVICES MS-0100
J P RITCHIE MS B214 T14 E W REECE MS 0307
N KRIKORIAN MS B228 D P KELLYMS 0307
R KIRKPATRICK MS B229 L WEIRICK MS 0327
R THURSTON MS B229 R TACHAU MS 0425
C T KLINGNER MS B294 D LONGCOPE MS 0439
R MILLER MS B294 D HAYES MS 0457
J WALTERMS C305 J ASAY MS 0458
B SHAFER MS C931 W TEDESCHI MS 0482
R STELLINGWERFMS D413 J SCHULZE MS 0483
PO BOX 1663 PO BOX 5800
LOS ALAMOS NM 87545 ALBUQUERQUE NM 87185-0100

29
NO. OF NO. OF
COPIES ORGANIZATION COPIES ORGANIZATION

29 SANDIA NATIONAL LABORATORIES 7 DIRECTOR

MAIL SERVICES MS-0100 LLNL
P A LONGMIREMS 0560 MS LI 22
J COREY MS 0576 R PIERCE
E S HERTEL JRMS 0819 R ROSINKY
A ROBINSON MS 0819 O J ALFORD
T TRUCANO MS 0819 D STEWART
J M MCGLAUN MS 0819 T VIDLAK
M VIGIL MS 0819 B R BOWMAN
R BRANNON MS 0820 W DIXON
L CHHABILDASMS 0821 PO BOX 808
J ANG MS 0821 LIVERMORE CA 94550
M BOSLOUGH MS 0821
D CRAWFORD MS 0821 2 DIRECTOR
M FURNISH MS 0821 LLNL
CHALL MS 0821 MS LI 25
W REINHART MS 0821 D R FAUX
P STANTON MS 0821 N W KLINO
M KIPP DIV 1533 PO BOX 808
P YARRINGTON DIV 1533 LIVERMORE CA 94550
J MCGLAWA DIV 1541
M FORRESTAL DIV 1551 1 DIRECTOR
R LAFARGE DIV 1551 LLNL
C HILLS DIV 1822 R BARKER LI 59
P TAYLOR ORG 1432 PO BOX 808
B LEVIN ORG 7816 LIVERMORE CA 94550
LNKMETYK
R REEDER 2 DIRECTOR
J SOUTHWARD LLNL
C KONRAD MS LI 80
KLANG G SIMONSON
PO BOX 5800 A SPERO
ALBUQUERQUE NM 87185-0100 PO BOX 808
LIVERMORE CA 94550
DIRECTOR
LLNL 1 DIRECTOR
MSL35 LLNL
R E TIPTON F A HANDLER L182
DBAUM PO BOX 808
T MCABEE LIVERMORE CA 94550
M MURPHY
PO BOX 808 2 DIRECTOR
LIVERMORE CA 94550 LLNL
MS L282
WTAO
PURTIEW
PO BOX 808
LIVERMORE CA 94550

30
NO. OF NO. OF
COPIES ORGANIZATION COPIES ORGANIZATION

DIRECTOR 1 DREXEL UNIVERSITY

LLNL MEMDEPT
MS L290 32ND & CHESTNUT ST
A HOLT PHILADELPHIA PA 19104
J E REAUGH
PO BOX 808 1 IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY
LIVERMORE CA 94550 DEPT PHYSICS AND ASTRONOMY
JROSE
ENERGETIC MATLS RSCH TSTNG CTR 34 PHYSICS
NEW MEXICO TECH AMES IA 50011
D J CHAVEZ
M LEONE 5 JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
L LIBERSKY APPLIED PHYSICS LAB
F SANDSTROM T R BETZER
CAMPUS STATION A R EATON
SOCORRO NM 87801 R H KEITH
D K PACE
NASA RLWEST
JOHNSON SPACE CENTER JOHNS HOPKINS ROAD
E CHRISTIANSEN LAUREL MD 20723
J L CREWS
FREDRICH HORZ 4 SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE
MAIL CODE SN3 C ANDERSON
2101 NASA RD 1 S A MULLIN
HOUSTON TX 77058 J RIEGEL
J WALKER
APPLIED RESEARCH LAB PO DRAWER 28510
J A COOK SAN ANTONIO TX 78228-0510
10000 BURNETT ROAD
AUSTIN TX 78758 2 UNIV OF ALA HUNTSVJLLE
AEROPHYSICS RSCH CTR
JET PROPULSION LABORATORY G HOUGH
IMPACT PHYSICS GROUP D J LIQUORNIK
Z SEKANINA PO BOX 999
P WEISSMAN HUNTSVILLE AL 35899
B WEST
J ZWISSLER 1 UNIV OF ALA HUNTSVILLE
MADAMS MECH ENGRNG DEPT
4800 OAK GROVE DR W P SCHONBERG
PASADENA CA 91109 HUNTSVILLE AL 35899

BOSTON UNIVERSITY UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS

DEPT OF PHYSICS PHYSICS BUILDING
Z JAEGER A V GRANATO
590 COMMONWEALTH AVE URBANA IL 61801
BOSTON MA 02215

31
NO. OF NO. OF
COPIES ORGANIZATION COPIES ORGANIZATION

1 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA 1 APPLIED RESEARCH LABORATORIES

P A HEINEY T M KIEHNE
DEPT OF PHYSICS & ASTRONOMY PO BOX 8029
209 SOUTH 33RD ST AUSTIN TX 78713-8029
PHILADELPHIA PA 19104
1 ATA ASSOCIATES
1 VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE W ISBELL
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING PO BOX 6570
DEPT ENGNG SCIENCE & MECHANICS SANTA BARBARA CA 93111
R C BATRA
BLACKSBURG VA 24061-0219 1 BATTELLE
R M DUGAS
2 AEROJET 7501 S MEMORIAL PKWY SUITE 101
J CARLEONE HUNTSVILLE AL 35802-2258
SKEY
PO BOX 13222 1 CENTURY DYNAMICS INC
SACRAMENTO CA 95813-6000 N BIRNBAUM
2333 SAN RAMON VALLEY BLVD
2 AEROJET ORDNANCE SAN RAMON CA 94583-1613
PWOLF
G PADGETT 1 COMPUTATIONAL MECHANICS
1100BULLOCHBLVD CONSULTANTS
SOCORRO NM 87801 J A ZUKAS
POBOX 11314
3 ALLIANT TECHSYSTEMS INC BALTIMORE MD 21239-0314
RSTRYK
G R JOHNSON MN11-1614 1 G E DUVALL
P SWENSON MN11-2720 5814 NE 82ND COURT
600 SECOND ST NE VANCOUVER WA 98662-5944
HOPKINS MN 55343
3 DYNA EAST CORP
1 M L ALME P C CHOU
2180 LOMA LINDA DR R CICCARELLI
LOS ALAMOS NM 87544-2769 WFLIS
3620 HORIZON DRIVE
1 APPLIED RESEARCH ASSOC INC KING OF PRUSSIA PA 19406
J D YATTEAU
5941 S MIDDLEFJELD RD SUITE 100 3 DYNASEN
LITTLETON CO 80123 JCHAREST
M CHAREST
2 APPLIED RESEARCH ASSOC INC M LILLY
DGRADY 20 ARNOLD PL
F MAESTAS GOLETACA 93117
SUITE A220
4300 SAN MATEO BLVD NE 1 R J EICHELBERGER
ALBUQUERQUE NM 87110 409 W CATHERINE ST
BEL AIR MD 21014-3613

32
NO. OF NO. OF
COPIES ORGANIZATION COPIES ORGANIZATION

1 ELORET INSTITUTE 1 KAMAN SCIENCES CORP

D W BOGDANOFF MS 230 2 D L JONES
NASA AMES RESEARCH CENTER 2560 HUNTINGTON AVE SUITE 200
MOFFETT FIELD CA 94035 ALEXANDRIA VA 22303

ENIG ASSOCIATES INC KAMAN SCIENCES CORP

JENIG J ELDER
D J PASTTNE R P HENDERSON
M COWPERTHWAITE D A PYLES
SUITE 500 F R SAVAGE
11120 NEW HAMPSHIRE AVE J A SUMMERS
SILVER SPRING MD 20904-2633 T W MOORE
TYEM
HUGHES MSL SYS CO 600 BLVD S SUITE 208
T STURGEON HUNTSVILLE AL 35802
BLDG 805 M/S D4
PO BOX 11337 KAMAN SCIENCES CORP
TUCSON AZ 85734-1337 S JONES
G L PADEREWSKI
INST OF ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY R G PONZINI
UNIVERSITY OF TX AUSTIN 1500 GRDN OF THE GODS RD
S J BLESS COLORADO SPRINGS CO 80907
J CAZAMIAS
J DAVIS KAMAN SCIENCES CORP
HD FAIR NARI
D LITTLEFIELD S R DIEHL
4030-2 W BRAKER LN WDOANE
AUSTIN TX 78759 VM SMITH
PO BOX 7463
INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOC COLORADO SPRINGS CO 80933-7463
DLORPHAL
4450 BLACK AVE D R KENNEDY & ASSOC INC
PLEASANTON CA 94566 D KENNEDY
PO BOX 4003
INTERPLAY MOUNTAIN VIEW CA 94040
F E WALKER
18 SHADOW OAK RD KERLEY PUBLISHING SERVICES
DANVILLE CA 94526 G I KERLEY
PO BOX 13835
ITT SCIENCES AND SYSTEMS ALBUQUERQUE NM 87192-3835
J WILBECK
600 BLVD SOUTH LOCKHEED MARTIN ELEC & MSLS
SUITE 208 G W BROOKS
HUNTSVILLE AL 35802 5600 SAND LAKE RD MP 544
ORLANDO FL 32819-8907
R JAMESON
624 ROWE DR LOCKHEED MARTIN MISSLE & SPACE
ABERDEEN MD 21001 W R EBERLE
PO BOX 070017
HUNTSVILLE AL 35807

33
NO. OF NO. OF
COPIES ORGANIZATION COPIES ORGANIZATION

1 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS 1 TRACOR ARSPC MINE

ASTRONAUTICS CO CNTRMN DIV
B L COOPER R E BROWN
5301 BOLSA AVE BOLLINGER CANYON
HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647 SAN RAMON CA 94583

NETWORK COMPUTING SERVICES INC ZERNOW TECHNICAL SVCS INC

T HOLMQUIST LZERNOW
1200 WASHINGTON AVE S 425 W BONITA AVE SUITE 208
MINNEAPOLIS MN 55415 SAN DIMAS CA 91773

ORLANDO TECHNOLOGY INC

D A MATUSKA ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND
M GUNGER
J OSBORN 22 DIR, USARL
R SZEZEPANSKI AMSRL-WM, I MAY
PO BOX 855 AMSRL-WM-BC, A ZIELINSKI
SHALIMAR FL 32579-0855 AMSRL-WM-BE, S L HOWARD
AMSRL-WM-BD,
PHYSICAL SCIENCES INC R PESCE-RODRIGUEZ
P NEBOLSINE A J KOTLAR
20 NEW ENGLAND BUS CTR AMSRL-WM-MB, G GAZONAS
ANDOVER MA 01810 AMSRL-WM-MC, J M WELLS
AMSRL-WM-T, T W WRIGHT
PRIMEX TECHNOLOGIES INC AMSRL-WM-TA,
GFRAZIER MBURKINS
LGARNETT W GELLICH
D OLIVER W BRUCHEY
DTUERPE JDEHN
J COFFENBERRY G FILBEY
2700 MERCED ST W A GOOCH
SAN LEANDRO CA 94577-0599 HW MEYER
E J RAPACKI
RAYTHEON ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS J RUNYEON
R LLOYD N RUPERT
50 APPLE HILL DRIVE AMSRL-WM-TB,
TEWKSBURY MA 01876 RFREY
P BAKER
J STERNBERG R LOTTERO
20 ESSEX LN J STARKENBERG
WOODBURY CT 06798

TELEDYNE BROWN ENGR

J W BOOTH
M B RICHARDSON
PO BOX 070007 MS 50
HUNTSVILLE AL 35807-7007

34
NO. OF
COPIES ORGANIZATION

25 DIR, USARL
AMSRL-WM-TC,
W S DE ROSSET
T W BJERKE
R COATES
FGRACE
K KIMSEY
M LAMPSON
D SCHEFFLER
S SCHRAML
G SILSBY
B SORENSEN
R SUMMERS
W WALTERS
AMSRL-WM-TD,
A M DIETRICH
D DANDEKAR
KFRANK
M RAFTENBERG
A RAJENDRAN
G RANDERS-PEHRSON, LLNL
M SCHEIDLER
S SCHOENFELD
S SEGLETES (2 CPS)
T WEERISOORIYA
AMSRL-WM-TE,
J POWELL
A PRAKASH

35
NO. OF NO. OF
COPIES ORGANIZATION COPIES ORGANIZATION

AERONAUTICAL & MARITIME 1 DEFENCE RSCH ESTAB SUFFIELD

RESEARCH LABORATORY C WEICKERT
N BURMAN BOX 4000 MEDICINE HAT
R WOODWARD ALBERTA TIA 8K6
S CIMPOERU CANADA
DPAUL
PO BOX 4331 DEFENCE RSCH ESTAB VALCARTIER
MELBOURNE VIC 3001 ARMAMENTS DIVISION
AUSTRALIA R DELAGRAVE
2459 PIE XI BLVD N
ABTEILUNG FUER PHYSIKALISCHE PO BOX 8800
CHEMIE CORCELETTE QUEBEC GOA 1R0
MONTANUNIVERSITAET CANADA
E KOENIGSBERGER
A 8700 LEOBEN UNIVERSITY OF GUELPH
AUSTRIA PHYSICS DEPT
C G GRAY
PRB S A GUELPH ONTARIO
M VANSNICK NIG 2W1
AVENUE DE TERVUEREN 168 BTE 7 CANADA
BRUSSELS B 1150
BELGIUM CEA
RCHERET
ROYAL MILITARY ACADEMY CEDEX 15
G DYCKMANS 313 33 RUE DE LA FEDERATION
E CELENS PARIS 75752
RENAISSANCE AVE 30 FRANCE
B1040 BRUSSELS
BELGIUM CEA
CISI BRANCH
BULGARIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES P DAVID
SPACE RESEARCH INSTITUTE CENTRE DE SACLAY BP 28
V GOSPODINOV GIF SURYVETTE 91192
1000 SOFIA PO BOX 799 FRANCE
BULGARIA
CEA/CESTA
CANADIAN ARSENALS LTD A GEILLE
P PELLETIER BOX2LEBARP33114
5 MONTEE DES ARSENAUX FRANCE
VILLIE DE GRADEUR PQ J5Z2
CANADA CENTRE D'ETUDES DE GRAMAT
C LOUPIAS
DEFENCE RSCH ESTAB SUFFIELD P OUTREBON
D MACKAY J CAGNOUX
RALSTON ALBERTA TOJ 2NO RALSTON C GALLIC
CANADA J TRANCHET
GRAMAT 46500
FRANCE

36
NO. OF NO. OF
COPIES ORGANIZATION COPIES ORGANIZATION

CENTRE D'ETUDES DE LMEIL-VALENTON FRENCH GERMAN RESEARCH INST

C AUSSOURD H-J ERNST
J-C BOZIER F JAMET
SAINT GEORGES CEDEX P LEHMANN
VILLENEUVE 94195 KHOOG
FRANCE H F LEHR
CEDEX 5 5 RUE DU GENERAL
CENTRE D'ETUDES DE VAUJOURS CASSAGNOU
J-P PLOT ARD SAINT LOUIS 68301
E BOTTET FRANCE
TAT SIHN VONG
BOITE POSTALE NO 7 BATTELLE INGENIEUTECHNIK GMBH
COUNTRY 77181 WFUCHE
FRANCE DUESSELDORFFER STR 9
ESCHBORN D 65760
CENTRE DE RECHERCHES GERMANY
ET D'ETUDES D'ARCUEIL
D BOUVART CONDAT
C COTTENNOT J KIERMEIR
S JONNEAUX MAXIMILIANSTR 28
H ORSINI 8069 SCHEYERN FERNHAG
S SERROR GERMANY
F TARDIVAL
16 BIS AVENUE PRIEUR DE DEUTSCHE AEROSPACE AG
LA COTE D'OR MHELD
F94114 ARCUEIL CEDEX POSTFACH 13 40
FRANCE D 86523 SCHROBENHAUSEN
GERMANY
DAT ETBS CETAM
C ALTMAYER DIEHL GBMH AND CO
ROUTE DE GUERRY BOURGES M SCHILDKNECHT
18015 FISCHB ACHSTRASSE 16
FRANCE D 90552 RÖTBENBACH AD PEGNITZ
GERMANY
ETBS DSTI
PBARNIER ERNST MACH INSTITUT
ROUTE DE GUERAY V HOHLER
BOITE POSTALE 712 E SCHMOLINSKE
18015 BOURGES CEDEX E SCHNEIDER
FRANCE KTHOMA
ECKERSTRASSE 4
FRENCH GERMAN RESEARCH INST D-7800 FREIBURG I BR 791 4
P-Y CHANTERET GERMANY
CEDEX 12 RUE DE I'INDUSTRIE
BP 301 EUROPEAN SPACE OPERATIONS CENTRE
F68301 SAINT-LOUIS WFLURY
FRANCE ROBERT-BOSCH-STRASSE 5
64293 DARMSTADT
GERMANY

37
NO. OF NO. OF
COPIES ORGANIZATION COPIES ORGANIZATION

FRAUNHOFER INSTITUT FUER UNIVERSITÄT PADERBORN

KURZZEITDYNAMIK FACHBEREICH 6 - PHYSIK
ERNST MACH INSTITUT O SCHULTE
H ROTHENHAEUSLER W B HOLZAPFEL
HSENF 33095 PADERBORN
E STRASSBURGER GERMANY
KLINGELBERG 1
D79588 EFRINGEN-KIRCHEN BHABHA ATOMIC RESEARCH CENTRE
GERMANY HIGH PRESSURE PHYSICS DIVISION
N SURESH
FRENCH GERMAN RESEARCH INST TROMBAY BOMBAY 400 085
G WEIHRAUCH INDIA
R HUNKLER
E WOLLMANN NATIONAL GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE
POSTFACH 1260 G PARTHASARATHY
WEIL AM RHEIN D-79574 HYDERABAD-500 007 (A. P.)
GERMANY INDIA

IABG UNIVERSITY OF ROORKEE

M BORRMANN DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS
H G DORSCH NDASS
EINSTEINSTRASSE 20 ROORKEE-247 667
D 8012 OTTOBRUN B MUENCHEN INDIA
GERMANY
RAFAEL BALLISTICS CENTER
INGENIEURBÜRO DEISENROTH E DEKEL
AUF DE HARDT 33 35 Y PARTOM
D5204 LOHMAR 1 G ROSENBERG
GERMANY Z ROSENBERG
Y YESHURUN
TU CHEMNITZ-ZWICKAU PO BOX 2250
I FABER HAIFA 31021
L KRUEGER ISRAEL
L MEYER
FAKULTAET FUER MASCHINENBAU U. TECHNION INST OF TECH
VERFAHRENSTECHNIK FACULTY OF MECH ENGNG
SCHEFFELSTRASSE 110 S BODNER
09120 CHEMNITZ TECHNION CITY
GERMANY HAIFA 32000
ISRAEL
TU MÜNCHEN
E IGENBERGS IHI RESEARCH INSTITUTE
ARCISSTRASSE 21 STRUCTURE & STRENGTH
8000 MÜNCHEN 2 TSHIBUE
GERMANY 1-15, TOYOSU 3
KOTO, TOKYO 135
JAPAN

38
NO. OF NO. OF
COPIES ORGANIZATION COPIES ORGANIZATION

1 ESTEC CS INSTITUTE OF MECH ENGNG PROBLEMS

D CASWELL V BULATOV
BOX 200 NOORDWUK D INDEITSEV
2200 AG V MESCHERYAKOV
NETHERLANDS BOLSHOY, 61, V.O.
ST PETERSBURG 199178
PRINS MAURTTS LABORATORY RUSSIAN REPUBLIC
H J REITSMA
E VAN RIET INSTITUTE OF MINEROLOGY & PETROGRAPHY
H PASMAN V A DREBUSHCHAK
R YSSELSTEIN UNIVERSITETSKI PROSPEKT, 3
TNO BOX 45 630090 NOVOSIBIRSK
RIJSWUK 2280AA RUSSIAN REPUBLIC
NETHERLANDS
IOFFE PHYSICO TECHNICAL INSTITUTE
ROYAL NETHERLANDS ARMY DENSE PLASMA DYNAMICS
J HOENEVELD LABORATORY
V D BURCHLAAN 31 E M DROBYSHEVSKI
PO BOX 90822 A KOZHUSHKO
2509 LS THE HAGUE ST PETERSBURG 194021
NETHERLANDS RUSSIAN REPUBLIC

INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS EPERAS

SILESIAN TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY A A BOGOMAZ
E SOCZKIEWICZ DVORTSOVAIA NAB 18
44-100 GLIWICE ST PETERSBURG
UL. KRZYWOUSTEGO 2 RUSSIAN REPUBLIC
POLAND
LAVRENTYEV INST. HYDRODYNAMICS
INSTITUTE OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS L A MERZHIEVSKY
A YU DOLGOBORODOV VICTOR V SILVESTROV
KOSYGIN ST 4 V 334 630090 NOVOSIBIRSK
MOSCOW RUSSIAN REPUBLIC
RUSSIAN REPUBLIC
MOSCOW INST OF PHYSICS & TECH
INSTITUTE OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS S V UTYUZHNIKOV
RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES DEPT OF COMPUTATIONAL
G I KANEL MATHEMATICS
A M MOLODETS DOLGOPRUDNY 1471700
S V RAZORENOV RUSSIAN REPUBLIC
A V UTKIN
142432 CHERNOGOLOVKA RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF MECHANICS
MOSCOW REGION NIZHNIY NOVGOROD STATE UNIVERSITY
RUSSIAN REPUBLIC ASADYRTN
P.R. GAYARINA 23 KORP 6
NIZHNIY NOVGOROD 603600
RUSSIAN REPUBLIC

39
NO. OF NO. OF
COPIES ORGANIZATION COPIES ORGANIZATION

RUSSIAN FEDERAL NUCLEAR CENTER 1 UNIVERSIDAD DE OVIEDO

VNIIEF FACULTAD DE QUIMICA
L F GUDARENKO DEPARTMENTO DE QUIMICA FISICA Y
R F TRUNIN ANALITICA
MIRA AVE., 37 E FRANCISCO
SAROV 607190 AVENIDA JULIAN CLAVERIA S/N
RUSSIAN REPUBLIC 33006 - OVIEDO
SPAIN
SAMARA STATE AEROSPACE UNIV
L G LUKASHEV 1 DYNAMEC RESEARCH AB
SAMARA A PERSSON
RUSSIAN REPUBLIC P.O. BOX 201
S-151 23 SÖDERTÄUE
TOMSK BRANCH OF THE INSTITUTE SWEDEN
FOR STRUCTURAL MACROKINETICS
V GORELSKI 6 NATL DEFENCE RESEARCH EST
8 LENIN SQ GSP 18 L HOLMBERG
TOMSK 634050 U LINDEBERG
RUSSIAN REPUBLIC L G OLSSON
L HOLMBERG
UNIVERSIDAD DE CANTABRIA B JANZON
FACULTAD DE CIENCIAS I MELLGARD
DEPARTMENTO DE FISICA APLICADA FOA BOX 551
J AMOROS TUMBA S-14725
AVDA DE LOS CASTROS S/N SWEDEN
39005 SANTANDER
SPAIN 2 SWEDISH DEFENCE RSCH ESTAB
DIVISION OF MATERIALS
DEPARTMENTO DE QUIMICA FISICA S J SAVAGE
FACULTAD DE CIENCIAS QUIMICAS J ERIKSON
UNIVERSIDAD COMPLUTENSE DE STOCKHOLM S-17290
MADRID SWEDEN
V G BAONZA
M TARAVTLLO 2 K&W THUN
M CACERAS WLANZ
JNUNEZ W ODERMATT
28040 MADRID ALLMENDSSTRASSE 86
SPAIN CH-3602 THUN
SWITZERLAND
CARLOS III UNIV OF MADRID
C NAVARRO 2 AWE
ESCUELA POLITEENICA M GERMAN
SUPERIOR W HARRISON
CI. BUTARQUE 15 FOULNESS ESSEX SS3 9XE
28911 LEGANES MADRID UNITED KINGDOM
SPAIN

40
NO. OF NO. OF
COPIES ORGANIZATION COPIES ORGANIZATION

1 CENTURY DYNAMICS LTD INSTITUTE FOR PROBLEMS IN

N FRANCIS MATERIALS STRENGTH
DYNAMICS HOUSE S FIRSTOV
HURST RD B GALANOV
HORSHAM O GRIGORIEV
WEST SUSSEX RH12 2DT V KARTUZOV
UNITED KINGDOM V KOVTUN
V MILMAN
DERA V TREFILOV
I CULLIS 3, KRHYZHANOVSKY STR
J P CURTIS 252142, KIEV-142
FORT HALSTEAD UKRAINE
SEVENOAKS KENT TN14 7BP
UNITED KINGDOM INSTITUTE FOR PROBLEMS OF STRENGTH
G STEPANOV
DEFENCE RESEARCH AGENCY TIMIRYAZEVSKAYU STR 2
W A J CARSON 252014 KIEV
I CROUCH UKRAINE
CFREW
T HAWKINS
B JAMES
B SHRUBSALL
CHOBHAM LANE CHERTSEY
SURREY KT16 OEE
UNITED KINGDOM

UK MINISTRY OF DEFENCE
G J CAMBRAY
CBDE PORTON DOWN SALISBURY
WITTSHIRE SPR OJQ
UNITED KINGDOM

K TSEMBELIS
SHOCK PHYSICS GROUP
CAVENDISH LABORATORY
PHYSICS & CHEMISTRY OF SOLIDS
UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE
CAMBRIDGE CB3 OHE
UNITED KINGDOM

UNIVERSITY OF KENT
PHYSICS LABORATORY
UNIT FOR SPACE SCIENCES
PGENTA
P RATCLIFF
CANTERBURY KENT CT2 7NR
UNITED KINGDOM

41
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

42
 Form Approved
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188
Public reporting burden tor this collection ol Information Is estimated to average 1 hour per response. Including the tin» tor reviewing Instructions, searching existing data sourcesT
gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of Information. Send ccmrwitsregardngthla burden eatknäte or any other aspect ot this
colsetlon of Intormatlon, Including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1i16 Jefferson
Davis Hlnhwav. Sun«. 1204. «mnnton. VA VJOMSm. m«, la the Office ol M.n.««n<«l and Budnet. fWwon. Reduction Prol«cl(07044)188l. Washington. DC 20M3.
1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED
February 1999 Final, Sep - Dec 98
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS

A Note on the Application of the Extended Bernoulli Equation

1L162618AH80
6. AUTHOR(S)

Steven B. Segletes and William P. Walters

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAMEfS) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION
REPORT NUMBER

U.S. Army Research Laboratory

ATTN: AMSRL-WM-TD ARL-TR-1895
Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005-5066
9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAMES(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10.SPONSORING/MONITORING
AGENCY REPORT NUMBER

11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words)

A general form of the momentum equation is presented. Because the solution is presented as an integral along a flow
line, it is here referred to as an "extended" Bernoulli equation. The equation, as presented, is valid for unsteady,
compressible, rotational, elasto-viscoplastic flows measured relative to a noninertial (translationally and/or rotationally
accelerating) coordinate system, whose motion is known. Though all of these concepts have long been separately
addressed in the educational literature of fluid and solid mechanics and dynamics, they are usually not available from a
single source, as the literature prefers to reduce the problem to special-case solutions for instructional purposes. Two
examples that make use of the extended Bernoulli equation in noninertial reference frames are solved. The
consequences of failing to properly account for noninertial effects are discussed.

14. SUBJECT TERMS 15. NUMBER OF PAGES

43
Bernoulli, noninertial, streamlines, penetration, acceleration 16. PRICE CODE

17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT
OF REPORT OF THIS PAGE OF ABSTRACT
UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED UL
NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89)
43 Prescribed by ANSI Std. 239-18 298-102
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

44
 USER EVALUATION SHEET/CHANGE OF ADDRESS
This Laboratory undertakes a continuing effort to improve the quality of the reports it publishes. Your comments/answers
to the items/questions below will aid us in our efforts.
1. ARL Report Number/Author ARL-TR-1895 (Sesletes'l Date of Report February 1999
2. Date Report Received
3. Does this report satisfy a need? (Comment on purpose, related project, or other area of interest for which the report will
be used.)

4. Specifically, how is the report being used? (Information source, design data, procedure, source of ideas, etc.).

5. Has the information in this report led to any quantitative savings as far as man-hours or dollars saved, operating costs
avoided, or efficiencies achieved, etc? If so, please elaborate.

6. General Comments. What do you mink should be changed to improve future reports? (Indicate changes to organization,
technical content, format, etc.)

Organization

CURRENT Name E-mail Name

ADDRESS
Street or P.O. Box No.

City, State, Zip Code

7. If indicating a Change of Address or Address Correction, please provide the Current or Correct address above and the Old
or Incorrect address below.

Organization

OLD Name
ADDRESS
Street or P.O. Box No.

City, State, Zip Code

(Remove this sheet, fold as indicated, tape closed, and mail.)

(DO NOT STAPLE)
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
NO POSTAGE
NECESSARY
IF MAILED
OFFICIAL BUSINESS IN THE
UNITED STATES
BUSINESS REPLY MAIL
FIRST CLASS PERMIT NO 0001.APG.MD

POSTAGE WILL BE PAID BY ADDRESSEE

DIRECTOR
US ARMY RESEARCH LABORATORY
ATTN AMSRLWMTD
ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND MD 21005-5066